Civil Procedure code-written ststement

Since written statement has been taken on record, no problem on that account. The plaintiff having participated without objecting at the first instance, invoke the plea of waiver/acquiescence against the plainiff. Also contend that such objections are supposed to be raised at the first avaiable opportunity and not at a belated stage. 

The plaintiff's case can be easily unsuited. See the judgment of the Supreme Court of India in Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu Versus Union of India

""Order VIII Rule 1 - Written Statement - Limitation - Provision of Order VIII Rule 1 providing for upper limit of 90 days to file written statement is directory - The rules or procedure are handmaid of justice and not its mistress. In the present context, the strict interpretation would defeat justice - The effect would be that under Rule 10 of Order VIII, the court in its discretion would have power to allow the defendant to file written statement even after expiry of period of 90 days provided in Order VIII Rule 1. There is no restriction in Order VIII Rule 10 that after expiry of ninety days, further time cannot be granted. The Court his wide power to 'make such order in relation to the suit as it thinks fit'. Clearly, therefore, the provision of Order VIII Rule 1 providing for upper limit of 90 days to file written statement is directory - Order extending time to file written statement cannot be made in routine. The time can be extended only in exceptionally hard cases. While extending time, it has to be borne in mind that the legislature has fixed the upper time limit of 90 days. The discretion of the Court to extend the time shall not be so frequently and routinely exercised so as to nullify the period fixed by Order VIII Rule 1""


The judgment is reported in the following journals.

2005 (5) SCJ 519: 2005 AIR(SC) 3353 : 2005 AIR(SCW) 3827 : 2005 (3) ArbLR 81 : 2005 (6) SCC 344 : 2005 (6) Scale 26 : 2005 (6) JT 486 : 2005 (5) Supreme 236

Also see

Kailash v Nanhku JT 2005 (4) SC 204 : 2005 (4) SCC 480 if written statement is the problem. As I understand the problem, written statement is already on record and Court has acted on the written statement by framing issues. So why to rake up this aspect?

[font=""times new roman""]Please see Aditya Hotel's case decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and reported in 2007(2) Bom.C.R. 53. In this case it has been clearly laid down that the P[/font][font=""times new roman""]roviso to  O8 R1  permits extension of time when  Court is satisfied about existence of reasons to be recorded in writing. If no such reasons are recorded then the order can be set aside. In your case if the court has not recorded reasons in writing in the order passed by it then the plaintiff has a good case and he can have such order be set aside. [/font]

[font=""Times New Roman""]Adv. Murtaza Najmi, Mumbai. [/font]

[font=""Times New Roman""]Please see Aditya Hotel's case decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and reported in 2007(2) Bom.C.R. 53. In this case it has been clearly laid down that the Proviso to  O8 R1  permits extension of time when  Court is satisfied about existence of reasons to be recorded in writing. If no such reasons are recorded then the order can be set aside. In your case if the court has not recorded reasons in writing in the order passed by it then the plaintiff has a good case and he can have such order be set aside. [/font]

[font=""Times New Roman""]Adv. Murtaza Najmi, Mumbai. [/font]

I am not disputing these propositions. But the ld. counsel says that ""all the procedural formalities have been completed pursuant to filing of written statement"" which means both the Court and the plaintiff have acted on the written statement. Now at the belated stage the plaintiff wants to challenge the written statement on technicalities. The Court having proceeded so far and the plaintiff having participated, can they baktrack or plaintiff be allowed to question the written statement. In my opinion the stage for challenging the written statement stands elapsed long back. Further question arises as to whether an act of court  can cause prejudice to a party. It was for the court to supply reasons for taking written statement on record and for the plaintiff to see that the court records reasons and if not done so, seek appropriate remedy within time. It all depends on the time frame.

I too subscribe the view taken by Sudarsan.

Thank you all, I am also with the the view taken by sudarsan.